FEAR or FAITH? FRIGHT or FLIGHT?Welcome Eagles to the New Crusade!Will thou help defend the Fortress of Faith?TradCatKnight- MOST VIEWED & FOLLOWEDTraditional Catholic APOSTOLATE Worldwide!As Seen on:Gloria.tv, SpiritDaily, Shoebat, Canon212, VeteransToday, Beforeitsnews& many other notable websitesBOOKMARK us & check in DAILY for the latest Endtimes News!Welcome to my Nest.#EagleoftheFortress WEBSITE OWNERS: Don't Forget To Add Us On Your Page!ALEXA- TOP 25K WEBSITE WORLDWIDE

Monday, November 14, 2016

Jewish voices from the past make mincemeat of Zionism and anti-Semitism

Jewish voices from the past make mincemeat of Zionism and anti-Semitism

"Zionism has always seemed to me to be a mischievous
political creed, untenable by any patriotic citizen of the United
Kingdom.” – Lord Montague

“Show me one time where a Jew was persecuted in any
country because of his religion…. It’s always their impact on the
political, social, or economic customs and traditions of the community
in which they settle.” – Benjamin Freedman

The latest anti-Semitism witch-hunt being conducted by the
Zio-Inquisition in the UK is all hogwash if the statements of two
leading Jews are to be believed.
One is the speech
by successful Jewish businessman Benjamin Freedman at the Willard
Hotel, Washington, in 1961. The other is a letter in 1917 by Lord Edwin
Samuel Montague, a prominnent British Jew, disagreeing with the Balfour
Declaration.

I had seen neither before. My attention was drawn to Freedman by
reader comments to a recent article of mine on the Balfour Declaration
(many thanks ‘Bill Rollinson’ and ‘frog’).
Freedman kicked off his his remarks at the Willard by saying that
just before the elections of 1960 Senator Kennedy (afterwards President
of the United States) went to New York and delivered an address to the
Zionist Organization of America. “In that address…. he stated that he
would use the armed forces of the United States to preserve the
existence of the regime set up in Palestine by the Zionists who are now
in occupation of that area.
“In other words, Christian boys are going to be yanked out of their
homes, away from their families, and sent abroad to fight in Palestine
against the Christian and Moslem Arabs who merely want to return to
their homes. And these Christian boys are going to be asked to shoot to
kill these innocent [Arab Palestinians] people who only want to follow
out fifteen resolutions passed by the United Nations in the last twelve
years calling upon the Zionists to allow these people to return to their
homes.”
And he warned that if the US went to war in Palestine “to help the
thieves retain possession of what they have stolen from these innocent
people”, no-one would fight alongside Americans as their ally.
Harking back to WW1 Freedman explained that by 1916 Germany had
effectively won. Thanks to the success of the U-boats Britain was alone,
almost out of ammunition and on the edge of starvation. Germany offered
peace terms, and while Britain chewed it over the Zionists of Germany
(representing the Zionists of Eastern Europe who wanted to see an end to
the Czar) came to London and said: “We will guarantee to bring the
United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side,
if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.”Balfour’s shabby promissory note
How could they make such a promise? “Because the newspapers here were
controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass
communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were
pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from
Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar…. they didn’t want
Russia to win this war. So the German bankers – the German-Jews – Kuhn
Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to
finance France or England to the extent of one dollar. They stood
aside and they said: ‘As long as France and England are tied up with
Russia, not one cent!’ But they poured money into Germany, they fought
with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.
“Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting
Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal…. Where the
newspapers had been all pro-German, where they’d been telling the people
of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain
commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no
good. They were villains…. Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson
declared war on Germany.”
Freedman went on to say it was “absolutely absurd” for Great Britain
to offer Palestine as “coin of the realm” to pay the Zionists for
bringing the United States into the war. But that was the bargain they
struck, in October 1916, ignoring pledges made to the Arabs for their
help. After they’d done their bit, the Zionists wanted a ‘receipt’ –
written confirmation of Britain’s pledge. Hence Balfour’s infamous
‘declaration’, a grubby promissory note addressed to Lord Rothschild.
The way Freedman tells it, when the war was over and the Germans went
to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, it was attended by a huge
delegation of Jews. Freedman says he was there. As the Great Powers
carved up the losers’ territories – German and Ottoman – the Jewish
delegation of course claimed Palestine. “They produced, for the first
time to the knowledge of the Germans, this Balfour Declaration. So the
Germans, for the first time realized, ‘Oh, that was the game! That’s
why the United States came into the war.’
“When the Germans realized this, they naturally resented it. Up to
that time, the Jews had never been better off in any country in the
world than they had been in Germany.” And that, according to Freeman, is
why Jews eventually came to pay such a horrendous price.
On the subject of Jews and anti-Semitism he made the crucial point
that the eastern European Jews accounted for 92 per cent of the world’s
Jews and were originally Khazars. “It’s ridiculous to call them ‘people
of the Holy Land’…. they outnumber all the rest by so many that they
create the impression that they are the Jewish ‘race’; that they are the
Jewish nation; that they are the Jewish people. . . and the Christians
swallow it like a cream puff.”
As for Semites, “The Christians talk about people who don’t like Jews
as anti-Semites, and they call all the Arabs anti-Semites. The only
Semites in the world are the Arabs. There isn’t one Jew who’s a
Semite. They’re all Turkothean Mongoloids. The Eastern European Jews….
they brainwashed the public.”
And he neatly disposed of the anti-Semitism kerfuffle by saying:
“Show me one time where a Jew was persecuted in any country because of
his religion. It has never happened. It’s always their impact on the
political, social, or economic customs and traditions of the community
in which they settle.”No such thing as a Jewish nation
An earlier bombshell had been dropped by Lord Montague, only the
second Jew to serve in a British cabinet. Coincidentally he was Minister
of Munitions in 1916 when, according to Freedman, Britain was running
out of ammunition.
In August 1917, while the Palestine deal was still being discussed but before Balfour issued his Declaration, Montague penned a memorandum to the British Cabinet headed ‘On the Anti-Semitism of the Present Government’.
He said he wanted to place on record his view that the policy of the
British Government was anti-Semitic because it would provide a rallying
ground for anti-Semites in every country in the world.
“Zionism has always seemed to me to be a mischievous political creed,
untenable by any patriotic citizen of the United Kingdom. If a Jewish
Englishman sets his eyes on the Mount of Olives and longs for the day
when he will shake British soil from his shoes and go back to
agricultural pursuits in Palestine, he has always seemed to me to have
acknowledged aims inconsistent with British citizenship and to have
admitted that he is unfit for a share in public life in Great Britain,
or to be treated as an Englishman.”
He said those who indulged in the Zionist creed were spurred by the
oppression of Jews in Russia. He assumed “Zionism meant that Mahommedans
and Christians were to make way for the Jews and that the Jews should
be put in all positions of preference and should be peculiarly
associated with Palestine in the same way that England is with the
English or France with the French, that Turks and other Mahommedans in
Palestine will be regarded as foreigners….
“When the Jews are told that Palestine is their national home, every
country will immediately desire to get rid of its Jewish citizens, and
you will find a population in Palestine driving out its present
inhabitants, taking all the best in the country, drawn from all quarters
of the globe.”
He argued that there was no such thing as a Jewish nation, and it was
no more true to say that a Jewish Englishman and a Jewish Moor are of
the same nation than it was to say that a Christian Englishman and a
Christian Frenchman are of the same nation. He wanted Jews in the UK to
be regarded, not as British Jews, but as Jewish Britons.
Montague was well aware of the unpopularity of the Jewish community.
“We have obtained a far greater share of this country’s goods and
opportunities than we are numerically entitled to…. Many of us have been
exclusive in our friendships and intolerant in our attitude, and I can
easily understand that many a non-Jew in England wants to get rid of
us….”
As for the Balfour Declaration itself he felt the Government was
carrying out the wishes of a Zionist organisation “largely run by men of
enemy descent or birth” and had thus “dealt a severe blow to the
liberties, position and opportunities of service of their Jewish
fellow-countrymen”. Furthermore, he said, “I would be almost tempted to
proscribe the Zionist organisation as illegal and against the national
interest.”
His message to Lord Rothschild was that the Government should help
Jews in Palestine enjoy liberty of settlement and life on equal terms
with the inhabitants of that country who hold other religious beliefs,
but go no further.
I wonder what either of them would say if they’d lived to see the
situation today on both sides of the Atlantic where Zionist bully-boys
run amok, and the degradation of the Holy Land where indigenous
Christian and Muslim communities are still horribly abused and
dispossessed by incomers with no ancestral connection with the region.
I wonder too how Benjamin Freedman would react to finding that the US
was still handing Israel billions of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars
and military equipment “to help the thieves retain possession of what
they have stolen”.
How many of us share Lord Montague’s subtle distinction between
American Jews and Jewish Americans, or in our case British Jews and
Jewish Brits?
And how many agree with Freedman that it’s the impact Jews have on
the customs and traditions of the community in which they settle, rather
than their religion that causes problems?
The words of Benjamin Freedman and Lord Montague reinforce what we’ve
heard from other knowledgeable sources. The truth is out there for
those who bother to listen.

ALEXA RANK

Find The Rank Of Any Website

DAILY NEWS- Scroll Thru The Latest News

Archbishop Lefebvre

“This Second Vatican Council Reform, since it has issued from Liberalism and from Modernism, is entirely corrupt; it comes from heresy and results in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is thus impossible for any faithful Catholic who is aware of these things to adopt this Reform, or to submit to it in any way at all. To ensure our salvation, the only attitude of fidelity to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, is a categorical refusal to accept the Reform.”

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Archbishop Lefebvre

“And we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith. ….Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion-another religion.”

TRADCATKNIGHT FORUM

FOLLOW TRADCATKNIGHT ON TUMBLR!

TCK Facebook

FOLLOW TRADCATKNIGHT ON PINTEREST

Archbishop Lefebvre

That Conciliar Church is a schismatic Church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship, all already condemned by the Church in many a document, official and definitive.... The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church...

Fr. Hesse Summary on Vatican II

Vatican II = Heretical & Schismatic

Exposing Vatican II & New Mass, Fr. Villa

Archbishop Lefebvre

“Well, we are not of this religion. We do not accept this new religion. We are of the religion of all time; we are of the Catholic religion. We are not of this 'universal religion' as they call it today-this is not the Catholic religion any more. We are not of this Liberal, Modernist religion which has its own worship, its own priests, its own faith, its own catechisms, its own Bible, the 'ecumenical Bible'-these things we do not accept."

Traditional Quotes & Prayers

The Real 3rd Secret of Fatima

Inlcudes Vatican II and the soon Apostate Church..."...because Fatima is a very apocalyptic message. It says that no matter what happens there are going to be terrible wars, there are going to be diseases, whole nations are going to be wiped out, there are going to be 3 days darkness, there are going to be epidemics that will wipe out whole nations overnight, parts of the earth will be washed away at sea and violent tornadoes and storms. It's not a nice message at all." Fr Malachi Martin

SSPX Marian Corps Donations

Marian Corps-Australasia

Fr. Chazal

Fr. Girouard

Or send a cheque made out to Fr. Patrick Girouard at : P.O.Box 1543, Aldergrove, BC, V4W 2V1, Canada.

St. Marcel Initiative

Or, if you prefer, in the U.S., make your contribution by telephone, toll free: 855-4-S. Marcel (855.476.2723), or internationally, by sending your donation directly to donations@stmarcelinitiative.com via PayPal.

TCK TESTIMONIALS

Eric Gajewski, Founder of DefeatModernism(formerly known as Defeat the Heresies)

Resistance Forum

True Traditionalist Forum

Pope XII: “Suicide Of Altering the Faith In Her Liturgy…..”

"I am worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past."A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, 'Where have they taken Him?'"

Signup To Google+. Then Youtube Then Begin Interacting! Click the Pic Above!

Current Crusaders Online Worldwide (RealTime)

St. Bernard:

Go forth confidently then, you knights, and repel the foes of the cross of Christ with a stalwart heart. Know that neither death nor life can separate you from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ, and in every peril repeat, "Whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's." What a glory to return in victory from such a battle! How blessed to die there as a martyr! Rejoice, brave athlete, if you live and conquer in the Lord; but glory and exult even more if you die and join your Lord. Life indeed is a fruitful thing and victory is glorious, but a holy death is more important than either. If they are blessed who die in the Lord, how much more are they who die for the Lord!

How secure, I say, is life when death is anticipated without fear; or rather when it is desired with feeling and embraced with reverence! How holy and secure this knighthood and how entirely free of the double risk run by those men who fight not for Christ! Whenever you go forth, O worldly warrior, you must fear lest the bodily death of your foe should mean your own spiritual death, or lest perhaps your body and soul together should be slain by him.

Indeed, danger or victory for a Christian depends on the dispositions of his heart and not on the fortunes of war. If he fights for a good reason, the issue of his fight can never be evil; and likewise the results can never be considered good if the reason were evil and the intentions perverse. If you happen to be killed while you are seeking only to kill another, you die a murderer. If you succeed, and by your will to overcome and to conquer you perchance kill a man, you live a murderer. Now it will not do to be a murderer, living or dead, victorious or vanquished. What an unhappy victory--to have conquered a man while yielding to vice, and to indulge in an empty glory at his fall when wrath and pride have gotten the better of you!

But what of those who kill neither in the heat of revenge nor in the swelling of pride, but simply in order to save themselves? Even this sort of victory I would not call good, since bodily death is really a lesser evil than spiritual death. The soul need not die when the body does. No, it is the soul which sins that shall die.

The knight of Christ, I say, may strike with confidence and die yet more confidently, for he serves Christ when he strikes, and serves himself when he falls. Neither does he bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister, for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of the good. If he kills an evildoer, he is not a mankiller, but, if I may so put it, a killer of evil. He is evidently the avenger of Christ towards evildoers and he is rightly considered a defender of Christians. Should he be killed himself, we know that he has not perished, but has come safely into port.

Once he finds himself in the thick of battle, this knight sets aside his previous gentleness, as if to say, "Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord; am I not disgusted with your enemies?" These men at once fall violently upon the foe, regarding them as so many sheep. No matter how outnumbered they are, they never regard these as fierce barbarians or as awe-inspiring hordes. Nor do they presume on their own strength, but trust in the Lord of armies to grant them the victory.

.

.

Saint Athanasius

"May God console you! ... What saddens you ... is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the premises – but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith?The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in the struggle – the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith? True, the premises are good when the Apostolic Faith is preached there; they are holy if everything takes place there in a holy way ..."You are the ones who are happy; you who remain within the Church by your Faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from Apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your Faith, beloved Brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day. "Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."